You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I guess it all depends on the judges... this one concludes that a reasonable viewer would make a distinction between track driving and road driving, yet we need "do not eat" warning labels on curling irons...
So am I understanding it right: such an influential media as BBC can lie and mislead millions of people worldwide? According to courts, it is OK to lie?
So am I understanding it right: such an influential media as BBC can lie and mislead millions of people worldwide? According to courts, it is OK to lie?
I read the ruling, and the gist as I understood it is that there was no libel because, according to the justices, no reasonable viewer would ever believe Clarksen's nonsense. I concur.
I read the ruling, and the gist as I understood it is that there was no libel because, according to the justices, no reasonable viewer would ever believe Clarksen's nonsense. I concur.
And yet, what I don't get, is that they claim to be a "factual entertainment program", and won the TV Choice Award in 2011 in that category. So the courts are completely wrong. Even the Guinness Book of World Records labels it as such. So I guess Guinness is "unreasonable" along with the entire TV industry. Ok, maybe that's true, but that's Tesla's point - most people believe it is factual, and that means most people would believe the lies that were spread, which would definitely make this libel.
I don't see Top Gear giving back either of those awards since they aren't really "factual" entertainment. In the very least, by winning this lawsuit, that's what they should do. This appeal may be Tesla's attempt to make them admit again that they aren't actually "factual entertainment", and maybe this extra press will spread the word.